The first of the two projects was launched in January 1943, by a team of three social psychologists at the University of California at Berkeley, Else Frenkel-Brunswik (a founding member of the Frankfurt Institute for Social Research, known as the '"Frankfurt School''), Daniel J. Levinson, and R. Nevitt Sanford [non-jewish]. What started out as a modest $500 grant to study the roots of anti-Semitism, would soon mushroom into the biggest mass social-profiling project ever undertaken in America, up until that time.

In May 1944, the American Jewish Committee established a Department of Scientific Research, which was headed by Frankfurt School director Max Horkheimer. Horkheimer established a project, called Studies in Prejudice, with generous funding from the AJCand other agencies, including the Rockefeller foundations. The Studies in Prejudice offered employment to a number of Frankfurt School members who, for various reasons, were not coopted directly into the war effort (for example, Herbert Marcuse [non-jewish] and Franz Neumann were brought into the Research and Analysis Section of the Office of Strategic Services, or OSS, the forerunner to today's Central Intelligence Agency). Hede Massing [soviet spy], Marie Jahoda, Morris Janowitz, andTheodor W. Adorno all worked on the Studies, and, under Horkheimer's direction, they all formally reconstituted the International Institute of Social Research, the transplanted incarnation of the original Frankfurt School of Weimar Germany.

The most significant of the five Studies in Prejudice, produced for the AJC during 1944-50, was The Authoritarian Personality (New York: Harper, 1950). Authors Adorno, Frenkel-Brunswik, Levinson, and Sanford assembled a large research team from the Berkeley Public Opinion Study and the International Institute of Social Research, to conduct thousands of interviews of Americans, to profile their allegedly deep-seated tendencies toward authoritarianism, prejudice, and anti-Semitism. Dr. William Morrow, the leading protégé of Dr. Kurt Lewin, who was one key, bridge figure between the Frankfurt School and the Tavistock Institute, was a research director for the Authoritarian Personality project.

The study was an exercise in self-fulfilling prophecy and Marxist/Freudian self-delusion. Long before the first survey questionnaire was drafted, Horkheimer and Adorno had written exhaustively about the "authoritarian'' character of the American nuclear family, about the "problem'' of the American people's belief in a transcendent monotheistic God, and about the underlying fascist character of all forms of American patriotism. They "cooked'' the survey data, in advance, by devising a series of scales, purporting to measure the American population's tendency toward anti-Semitism, ethnocentricity, anti-democratic ideology, and, ultimately, fascism. Not surprisingly, the research team found the American public "guilty as charged,'' and produced dire warnings that, unless a dramatic overhaul of the American ideology and mass culture were carried out, America would soon emerge as a Fourth Reich, repeating the horrors of Hitler on an even grander scale.

The authors of The Authoritarian Personality let it all hang out in the concluding chapter of the book, in which they summarized their findings and spelled out their recipe for social transformation:

"It seems obvious, that the modification of the potentially fascist structure cannot be achieved by psychological means alone. The task is comparable to that of eliminating neurosis, or delinquency, or nationalism from the world. These are products of the total organization of society and are to be changed only as that society is changed. It is not for the psychologist to say how such changes are to be brought about. The problem is one which requires the efforts of all social scientists. All that we would insist upon is that in the councils or round tables where the problem is considered and action planned the psychologist should have a voice. We believe that the scientific understanding of society must include an understanding of what it does to people, and that it is possible to have social reforms, even broad and sweeping ones, which though desirable in their own right would not necessarily change the structure of the prejudiced personality. For the fascist potential to change, or even to be held in check, there must be an increase in people's capacity to see themselves and to be themselves. This cannot be achieved by the manipulation of people, however well grounded in modern psychology the devices of manipulation might be.... It is here that psychology may play its most important role. Techniques for overcoming resistance, developed mainly in the field of individual psychotherapy, can be improved and adapted for use with groups and even for use on a mass scale.''

The authors conclude with this most revealing proposition: "We need not suppose that appeal to emotion belongs to those who strive in the direction of fascism, while democratic propaganda must limit itself to reason and restraint. If fear and destructiveness are the major emotional sources of fascism, eros belongs mainly to democracy.''

Eros was precisely the weapon that the Frankfurt School and their fellow-travellers employed, over the next 50 years, to create a cultural paradigm shift away from the so-called "authoritarian'' matrix of man in the living image of God (imago viva Dei), the sanctity of the nuclear family, and the superiority of the republican form of nation-state over all other forms of political organization. They transformed American culture toward an erotic, perverse matrix, associated with the present "politically correct'' tyranny of tolerance for dehumanizing drug abuse, sexual perversion, and the glorification of violence. For the Marxist/Freudian revolutionaries of the Frankfurt School, the ultimate antidote to the hated Western Judeo-Christian civilization was to tear that civilization down, from the inside, by turning out generations of necrophiliacs.

If this statement seems harsh, consider the following. In his 1948 work on The Philosophy of Modern Music, Frankfurt School leader Theodor Adorno argued that the purpose of modern music is to literally drive the listener insane. He justified this by asserting that modern society was a hotbed of evil, authoritarianism, and potential fascism, and that, only by first destroying civilization, through the spread of all forms of cultural pessimism and perversity, could liberation occur. On the role of modern music, he wrote, "It is not that schizophrenia is directly expressed therein; but the music imprints upon itself an attitude similar to that of the mentally ill. The individual brings about his own disintegration.... He imagines the fulfillment of the promise through magic, but nonetheless within the realm of immediate actuality.... Its concern is to dominate schizophrenic traits through the aesthetic consciousness. In so doing, it would hope to vindicate insanity as true health.'' Necrophilia, he added, is the ultimate expression of "true health'' in this sick society.

Erich Fromm, another leading Frankfurt School figure, who was instrumental as early as the 1930s in devising the scales used in the Authoritarian Personality study, devoted much of his seminal 1972 work, The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness, to the analysis of necrophilia, which he pronounced to be the dominant trend in modern society. Fromm defined necrophilia as all forms of obsession with death and destruction, particularly those with intense sexual overtones. Ironically, his ostensible "cure'' for this mass social perversion was the drug, rock, sex counterculture of the late 1960s. "Simultaneously with the increasing necrophilous development,'' Fromm wrote in his chapter on "Malignant Aggression: Necrophilia,'' "the opposite trend, that of love of life, is also developing. It manifests itself in many forms: in the protest against the deadening of life, a protest by people among all social strata and age groups, but particularly by the young. There is hope in the rising protest against pollution and war.... This protest is also to be understood in the attraction to drugs among the young.''(...)

The
‘Right’ of the political dichotomy, including even social and moral
values that have traditionally been regarded – until recently – as
normative, has for approximately eighty years, been the subject of
analysis not just politically and sociologically, but psychologically.

The
impetus for a psychological analysis of the Right and even of
conservative morality, as a mental aberration, was led by the Frankfurt
School of Critical Theory which, with the rise of Hitler, was
transferred en masse to the USA under the auspices of Columbia
University, where it was re-established in New York as the Institute of
Social Research.[1] The seminal document issued by this coterie, headed
by Theodore Adorno, was The Authoritarian Personality,[2] a
psychological study which intended to show through statistical analysis
with a survey based on an ‘F’ (Fascism) Scale, that traditional values
on morality, and especially the family and parental authority, were in
need of psychological reorientation and were symptoms of latent
‘fascism’. In particular, the patriarchal family came under attack as
the root institution for the cultivation of a ‘fascist’ mentality.[3]

While
Leftist social scientists such as those of the Frankfurt School sought
to show through statistical analysis that conservative values are
psychologically abnormal, concurrently there was a move to show that
Leftists have normative values. Rothman and Lichter in their
psycho-historical study of Jews in the US New Left, state that studies
by social scientists have been devised to show that Leftists possess
positive, normative values. They write that in the USA and to a lesser
extent Europe most ‘commentaries and “scientific” studies of the student
movement agreed that the radical young represented the best in their
societies’. Rothman and Lichter point out that the studies involved very
small numbers and that the examiners’ sympathies were with their
subjects politically. This coterie of social scientists produced a
stream of studies ‘that seemed to prove, that radical students were
democratic, humanitarian, psychologically healthy and morally advanced’.
‘All these critical studies are either impressionistic or based on
small samples’.[4]

Many social scientists attributed many
‘positive’ personality attributes or political views to the New Left
largely because their questionnaires were either constructed in such a
manner as to ascribe such attributes to radical students almost by
definition, or because the students… knew how to respond ‘appropriately’
to the questions posed.[5]

Hence the perception has
persisted that that ‘Right’ is based on values emanating from the
mentally dysfunctional, often based in the patriarchal family; and the
‘Left’ is mentally healthy. Rothman and Lichter are critical of the
Frankfurt School, and the use of the so-called “‘F’ scale to uncover
‘Fascist’ tendencies as personality types. Rothman and Lichter argue
that The Authoritarian Personality was a study intended to confirm the
preconceived opinions of the authors.[6]

However, Rothman and
Lichter’s studies of New Left students found that ‘radicals were
significantly more likely than moderates to manifest tendencies toward a
negative identity, masochistic surrender and treating people as
concepts’. Jewish radicals typically manifested a tendency to escape
from a dominating mother, while non-Jewish radicals regarded their
fathers as more dominant but flawed.[7]

Although the synthesis
of Freudianism and Marxism was unacceptable to the Stalinists, and the
Critical Theorists were rejected by the German Communist Party,[8] the
USSR found psychiatry a useful means of silencing ‘dissidents’ by
subjecting them to psychiatric examination and routinely diagnosing them
as schizophrenic, whereafter they would be confined to a mental asylum
and concomitantly anti-Sovietism identified as a form of psychosis.[9]

The
celebrated poet Ezra Pound received similar treatment on his forcible
return from Italy to the USA after World War II, having first been
confined to an open air cage by the American occupation forces in Italy.
To avoid the publicity of a treason trial for one of the world’s most
eminent literati, Pound was confined to St Elizabeths mental asylum.[10]

Use of Psychiatry against Dissidents in the Liberal West

The
Right has continued to be portrayed as a mental aberration, whether in
its most extreme Hitlerite forms, or merely as enduring conservative
values on the family, such values being portrayed as regressive. For
example, the seminal post-War ‘fascist’ philosopher Francis Parker
Yockey, upon his arrest for passport violations in San Francisco in
1960, was ordered to undergo a mental examination by the Court[11]
ensuring that anyone who tended towards such ideas could likewise be
relegated as insane. Indeed, he committed suicide in prison during trial
for the very reason that he feared being subjected to lobotomy or
medication that would reduce him to a mentally vegetative state.[12]
While the Leftist or liberal critic would typically respond that this in
itself indicates Yockey’s mental state, the situation is not that
simplistic, especially at that time.

Indeed, Dr Thomas Szasz,
professor emeritus of psychiatry at the University of Syracuse New York
Upstate Medical University, and an eminent critique of Freudianism, has
written that ‘we are replacing social controls justified by race with
social controls justified by psychiatric diagnosis’. Szasz cites the
case of General Edwin Walker, a primary victim of the Kennedy era
witch-hunt against ‘Right-wingers’ in the military. Walker was forced to
resign due to his anti-Communist education programme among the American
military forces in Germany. Apparently the Liberal-American conflict
with the USSR was not supposed to extend to an examination of Communist
ideology, which might come uncomfortably close to ‘Right-wing
extremism’. Gen. Walker, after his forced resignation, became a
prominent fighter against desegregation, communism and liberalism.
Walker assisted Governor Ross Barnett in leading mass resistance against
the desegregation of the University of Mississippi, enforced by the
invasion of Mississippi by Federal Troops in 1962. Szasz writes:

Arrested on four federal charges,
including ‘inciting, assisting, and engaging in an insurrection against
the authority of the United States,’ Walker was taken before a U.S.
commissioner and held pending the posting of $100,000 bond. While he was
making arrangements to post bail, Attorney General Robert Kennedy
ordered Walker flown, on a government aircraft, to Springfield,
Missouri, to be incarcerated in the U.S. Medical Center for Prisoners
for ‘psychiatric observation’ on suspicion that he was mentally unfit to
stand trial.[13]

Walker’s entry in Wikipedia mentions
neither this nor the ensuing confrontation between Walker’s legal team
and the government’s psychiatric team. The reader is told only that
Walker ‘posted bond and returned home to Dallas, where he was greeted by
a crowd of 200 supporters. After a federal grand jury adjourned in
January 1963 without indicting him, the charges were dropped’.[14]

Szasz
is able to write on the Walker case from first-hand experience, as he
was asked to advise Walker’s legal team. Of particular interest here is
that Szasz writes:

I summarized the evidence for my view
that psychiatry is a threat to civil liberties, especially to the
liberties of individuals stigmatized as ‘right-wingers’, illustrated by
the famous case of Ezra Pound, who was locked up for 13 years while the
government ostensibly waited for his ‘doctors’ to restore his competence
to stand trial. Now the Kennedys and their psychiatrists were in the
process of doing the same thing to Walker.[15]

Had Yockey
therefore been so ‘paranoid’ two years previously when he was worried
that he would be diagnosed insane, locked away in a facility and
subjected to cerebral destruction through the then widely used methods
of lobotomy or electric shock?

Szasz told the legal team that it
would be no use trying to argue for Walker’s released on the basis of
truth. However, the defence expert witness, Dr. Robert L. Stubblefield,
chief psychiatrist at the Southwest Medical Center in Dallas, was able
to expose Dr. Manfred Guttmacher, long-time chief medical officer at
Baltimore City’s Supreme Court, as ‘an evil quack’, as Szasz states it,
Walker was declared mentally fit, and a Federal Grand Jury refused to
indict him.

Szasz states that even Senator Barry Goldwater two
years later, as Republican Presidential candidate, was a target of
politicised psychiatry:

Less than two years later, my view that
organized American psychiatry was becoming overtly political, seeking
the existential invalidation and psychiatric destruction of individuals
who do not share the psychiatric establishment’s left-liberal
‘progressive’ views, received further dramatic support. In 1964, when
Senator Barry Goldwater was the Republican candidate for president,
1,189 psychiatrists publicly declared–without benefit of
examination–that Goldwater was ‘psychologically unfit to be President of
the United States’. Many offered a diagnosis of ‘paranoid
schizophrenia’ as the basis for their judgment.[16]

The use
of psychiatry to marginalize political opponents of Left-liberal dogma
is obviously not a mere paranoid delusion of the Right. Hence, for
example, The Nizkor Project, which specialises in smearing Rightists and
‘Holocaust deniers’, uses a psychiatric term in describing the US
‘militia movement’ as ‘paranoid’’.[17]

Yet the Left, despite its
manifestation of the most extreme forms of sadism since the French
Revolution of 1789-92, has largely escaped critical psychological
analyses of its leaders and ideologues. The Left is now doctrinally
acceptable as normative, and the adherents of its most extreme variation
– communism – can maintain respectable positions in academia, and have
their books published by the large publishers, while those of the Right
are marginalized.

Rather, Karl Marx for example, continues to be
feted among respectable quarters as a seminal and still valuable
contributor to sociology. While Jim Jones is generally perceived as
deranged, he is considered within the context of any other cult leader
such as David Koresh, rather than as an apostle of the Left whose
actions were consistent with the Left doctrinally and historically, and
whose psychological profile is analogous to that of other Leftists still
regarded as paragons of democratic and liberal values.

The Left and the Degenerative Personality

The
Hungarian physician and sociologist Dr Max Nordau wrote on the
degeneration of culture and philosophy as a symptom of mental and moral
degeneration. Writing in 1895, Nordau provided a proto-psychohistorical
perspective on Leftist revolutions, which was developed several decades
later by the American, Dr Lothrop Stoddard, who described such upheavals
as the ‘revolt against civilisation’.[18] This theory postulates that
civilisational values are an unendurable burden upon the mentally
subnormal, including types that are both what might popularly be called
the ‘unbalanced genius’ and the common criminal. Hence, the ‘revolt
against civilisation’ is rationalised as a political doctrine for the
overthrow of social order, and the unleashing of pent-up depravity. The
revolutionary Left is rationalised sociopathology.

Dr Nordau described several types of social marginality, which often includes the highly intelligent:

Quite a number of different designations
have been found for these persons. Maudsley and Ball call them
‘Borderland dwellers’ – that is to say, dwellers on the borderland
between reason and pronounced madness. Magnan gives to them the name of
‘higher degenerates’ and Lombroso[19] speaks of mattoids (from matto,
the Italian for insane).[20]

These ‘mattoids’ or ‘borderland
dwellers’ provide the leadership of social upheavals, while the types
that might typically be found in the criminal underworld provide the
mobs. Nordau states:

In the mental development of degenerates,
we meet with the same irregularity that we have observed in their
physical growth. The asymmetry of face and cranium finds, as it were,
its counterpart in their mental faculties. Some of the latter are
completely stunted, others morbidly exaggerated. That which nearly all
degenerates lack is the sense of morality and of right and wrong. For
them there exists no law, no decency, no modesty. In order to satisfy
any momentary impulse, or inclination, or caprice, they commit crimes
and trespasses with the greatest calmness and self-complacency, and do
not comprehend that other persons take offence. When this phenomenon is
present in a high degree, we speak of ‘moral insanity’ with Maudsley;
there are, nevertheless, lower stages in which the degenerate does not,
perhaps, himself commit any act which will bring him into conflict with
the criminal code, but at least asserts the theoretical legitimacy of
crime; seeks, with philosophically sounding fustian, to prove that
‘good’ and ‘evil,’ virtue and vice, are arbitrary distinctions; goes
into raptures over evildoers and their deeds; professes to discover
beauties in the lowest and most repulsive things; and tries to awaken
interest in, and so-called ‘comprehension’ of, every bestiality. The two
psychological roots of moral insanity, in all its degrees of
development, are, firstly, unbounded egoism, and, secondly,
impulsiveness: – i.e., inability to resist a sudden impulse to any deed;
and these characteristics also constitute the chief intellectual
stigmata of degenerates.[21]

Nordau considers how the ‘mattoid’ uses revolution as an outlet for destructive urges:

In view of Lombroso’s researches [Lombroso, La Physionomie des Anarchistes,1891,
p. 227] it can scarcely be doubted that the writings and acts of
revolutionists and anarchists are also attributable to degeneracy. The
degenerate is incapable of adapting himself to existing circumstances.
This incapacity, indeed, is an indication of morbid variation in every
species, and probably a primary cause of their sudden extinction. He
therefore rebels against conditions and views of things which he
necessarily feels to be painful, chiefly because they impose upon him
the duty of self-control, of which he is incapable on account of his
organic weakness of will. Thus he becomes an improver of the world, and
devises plans for making mankind happy, which, without exception, are
conspicuous just as much by their fervent philanthropy, and often
pathetic sincerity, as by their absurdity and monstrous ignorance of all
real relations.[22]

It is the ‘mattoids’ who provide the
philosophical justification for violence done against civilized values
in the name of ‘freedom’, and who continue to be upheld by today’s
intelligentsia, itself often of mattoid type, as ‘great thinkers’.
Nordau writes of them:

“The degenerate,’’ says Legrain, [Paul Maurice Legrain, Du délire chez les dégénérés;
Paris, 1886, p. 11] may be a genius. A badly balanced mind is
susceptible of the highest conceptions, while, on the other hand, one
meets in the same mind with traits of meanness and pettiness all the
more striking from the fact that they co-exist with the most brilliant
qualities. ‘As regards their intellect, they can (says Jacques
Roubinovitch, Hystérie male et dégénérescence; Paris,1890,
p.33) ‘attain to a high degree of development, but from a moral point
of view their existence is completely deranged … A degenerate will
employ his brilliant faculties quite as well in the service of some
grand object as in the satisfaction of the basest propensities (Lombroso
has cited a large number of undoubted geniuses who were equally
undoubted mattoids, graphomaniacs, or pronounced lunatics.)[23]

It
is perhaps more than anything else that the forces of the Left, in both
Socialist and Liberal-democratic forms, masquerade as the wave of the
future, while any individual, doctrine or institution opposing or
blocking them is disparaged as regressive. Yet, as Nordau pointed out
over a century ago, these ‘moderns’, these ‘progressives’, who disparage
all tradition and want to make the world anew, are the heralds of
atavism, whether in the arts, ethics or politics. Nordau continues:

Retrogression, relapse – this is in
general the ideal of this band who dare to speak of liberty and
progress. They wish to be the future. That is one of their chief
pretensions. That is one of the means by which they catch the largest
number of simpletons. We have, however, seen in all individual cases
that it is not the future but the most forgotten, far-away past
Degenerates lisp and stammer, instead of speaking. They utter
monosyllabic cries, instead of constructing grammatically and
syntactically articulated sentences. They draw and paint like children,
who dirty tables and walls with mischievous hands. They compose music
like that of the yellow natives of East Asia. They confound all the
arts, and lead them back to the primitive forms they had before
evolution differentiated them. Every one of their qualities is
atavistic, and we know, moreover, that atavism is one of the most
constant marks of degeneracy.[24]

Nordau wrote of these
‘modernist’ trends in art, philosophy and politics as going against the
normative values that decades later started to be described by Adorno
and his team from the Frankfurt School of Critical Theory as incipient
‘fascism’:

The ‘freedom’ and ‘modernity’, the
‘progress’ and ‘truth’, of these fellows are not ours. We have nothing
in common with them. They wish for self-indulgence; we wish for work.
They wish to drown consciousness in the unconscious; we wish to
strengthen and enrich consciousness. They wish for evasive ideation and
babble; we wish for attention, observation, and knowledge. The criterion
by which true modems may be recognised and distinguished from impostors
calling themselves moderns may be this: Whoever preaches absence of
discipline is an enemy of progress; and whoever worships his ‘I’ is an
enemy to society. Society has for its first premise, neighbourly love
and capacity for self-sacrifice; and progress is the effect of an ever
more rigorous subjugation of the beast in man, of an ever tenser
self-restraint, an ever keener sense of duty and responsibility. The
emancipation for which we are striving is of the judgement, not of the
appetites.[25]

If one notes what Nordau was describing as
normative civilisational values in 1895, he would certainly have been
diagnosed as mentally imbalanced and an incipient ‘fascist’, possibly
even an ‘anti-Semitism’ – if we disregard his Jewish background and role
in later life in the Zionist movement – by Adorno and the other authors
of The Authoritarian Personality.

Jacobinism and Bolshevism: The Revolt of the Under-Man

Lothrop
Stoddard, whose works became very widely read in the early 20th
century, writing in the aftermath of the Bolshevik upheaval that had
reduced Russia to a hell, took up the theme of mental and physical
degeneration as causes of revolt against civilisational values by what
he termed the ‘under-man’. Giving an account of the personality types of
the Bolsheviks and their methods of sadism, Stoddard wrote:

It would be extremely instructive if the
Bolshevik leaders could be psycho-analyzed. Certainly, many of their
acts suggest peculiar mental states. The atrocities perpetrated by some
of the Bolshevik Commissars, for example, are so revolting that they
seem explicable only by mental aberrations like homicidal mania or the
sexual perversion known as sadism.

One such scientific examination of a
group of Bolshevik leaders has been made. At the time of the Red terror
in the city of Kiev, in the summer of 1919, the medical professors of
Kiev University were spared on account of their usefulness to their
terrorist masters. Three of these men were competent alienists, who were
able to diagnose the Bolshevik leaders mentally in the course of their
professional duties. Now their diagnosis was that nearly all the
Bolshevik leaders were degenerates, of more or less unsound mind.
Furthermore, most of them were alcoholics, a majority were syphilitic,
while many were drug fiends…[26]

Stoddard gives a dramatic
illustration of the roles being played out in such revolts, when an
internationally acclaimed philology scholar, Professor Timofie Florinsky
of Kiev University, was brought before the Revolutionary Tribunal, and
spontaneously shot by one of the ‘judges’ for giving an ‘irritating
reply’ to a question. The murderous Commissar, Rosa Schwartz, a former
prostitute, was drunk.[27]

The Kiev event is pregnant with
historical and cultural meaning. The clash of two worlds, fundamentally
alien to each other but coinciding in time and space: the commissar, a
drunken ex-whore, puts to death in an instant of primal savagery the
scholar. Such scenes had been played out en masse by the mobs during the
French Revolution, continuously plied with alcohol and drugs, pushed
onward by prostitutes, pirates and criminals, and agitated by mattoids
from among depraved elements of the upper and middle classes.

While
it now seems to be regarded as passé to refer to what was once widely
called the Red Terror in Bolshevik Russia, attention being drawn almost
entirely to the ‘crimes of the Nazis’, any reference to major atrocities
other than that involving Jews being regarded as ‘relativising the
Holocaust’,[28] the implementation of the Bolshevik policy on terror
shows symptoms of mass sadism in a literal, psychotic sense. One must go
to the accounts of the time, however, in order to realise the character
of the sadism.

After Denikin’s White Army defeated the
Bolsheviks at Odessa in August 1919, Rev. R Courtier-Forster, Chaplain
of the British forces at Odessa and the Black Sea ports, who had been
held captive by the Bolsheviks, reported the horrors of Bolshevism,
relating how on the ship “Sinope”, the largest cruiser of the Black Sea
Fleet, some of his personal friends had been chained to planks and
slowly pushed into the ship’s furnaces to be roasted alive. Others were
scalded with steam from the ship’s boilers. Mass rapes were committed,
while the local Soviet press debated the possibilities of nationalizing
women. The screams from women being raped, and from other victims in
what Rev. Courtier-Forster called the ‘Bolshevik’s House of Torture’ at
Catherine Square, could be heard for blocks around, while at Catherine
Square the Bolsheviks tried to muffle the screams with the noise of
lorries thundering up and down the street.[29]

When the Rohrberg
Commission of Enquiry entered Kiev, after the Soviets had been driven
out in August 1919, it described the ‘execution hall’ of the Bolsehvik
secret police, the Cheka, as follows:

All the cement floor of the great garage
(the execution hall of the departmental Cheka of Kiev) was flooded with
blood. This blood was no longer flowing, it formed a layer of several
inches: it was a horrible mixture of blood, brains, of pieces of skull,
of tufts of hair and other human remains. All the walls were bespattered
with blood; pieces of brains and scalps were sticking to them. A gutter
twenty-five centimetres wide by twenty-five centimetres deep and about
ten metres long ran from the centre of the garage towards a subterranean
drain. This gutter along its whole length was full to the top with
blood…Usually as soon as the massacre had taken place the bodies were
conveyed out of the town in motor lorries and buried beside the grave
about which we have spoken; we found in a corner of the garden another
grave which was older and contained about eighty bodies. Here we
discovered on the bodies traces of cruelties and mutilations the most
varied and unimaginable. Some bodies were disembowelled, others had
limbs chopped off, some were literally hacked to pieces. Some had their
eyes put out and the head, face, neck and trunk covered with deep
wounds. Further on we found a corpse with a wedge driven into the chest.
Some had no tongues. In a corner of the grave we discovered a certain
quantity of arms and legs….[30]

Such atavistic savagery goes
even beyond mass murder. It is the psychosis of a Jeffrey Dahmer,[31] or
Edward Gein,[32] rationalised as a political ideology with noble
ideals, that continues to have adherents with respectable positions in
academia.

The precursor of the Bolshevik Revolution, that of
France during the period 1789-1792 unleashed a mass psychosis of revolt
of the dregs of France, led by the mattoid elements. As in today’s
Western liberal-democracies, the theory is that manifestations of
inequality and differences can be eliminated by changing the social
structure according to dogma. The doctrine of the French Revolution was a
‘return to Nature’, an idolised and imaginative interpretation of what
Nature was supposed to be like, concocted in the drawing rooms of the
European intelligentsia, by writers such as Voltaire, Rousseau, and
Weishaupt, the founder of the proto-communist Illuminati. According to
these ideologues, the cause of tyranny, injustice, violence and
inequality, was civilisation. If civilisation itself could be overthrown
and humanity returned to a supposed innocent state of nature, then all
could live in an idyllic state of happiness, peace and brotherhood. This
requires the abolition of civilisational institutions such as marriage,
private property, Church, state, monarchy. Karl Marx formalized
precisely the same doctrine about half a century later. This atavism is
ironically heralded as ‘progressive’.

The French sociologist Gustave Le Bon noted in 1895:

The idea that institutions can remedy the
defects of societies, that national progress is the consequence of the
improvement of institutions and governments, and that social changes can
be effected by decrees – this idea, I say, is still generally accepted.
It was the starting point of the French Revolution, and the social
theories of the present day are based upon it.[33]

Le Bon
later wrote, in the aftermath of the Bolshevik Revolution, of the same
atavism that had afflicted France now unfolding in Russia:

The Bolshevik mentality is as old as
history. Cain, in the Old Testament, had the mind of a Bolshevik. But it
is only in our days that this ancient mentality has met with a
political doctrine to justify it. This is the reason of its rapid
propagation, which has been undermining the old social scaffolding.[34]

The
reader is referred to Nesta H Webster’s history, The French
Revolution,[xxxv] which draws on contemporary documents from both
Jacobins and Royalists, which dramatically brings to life the depravity
and cowardice of the dregs of France, led by disaffected mattoid lawyers
and Orleanist aristocrats, and of the heroism of those loyal to the
King, including those among the common folk. What is notable in this
context is the manner by which the mob could be agitated with the
continuous supply of alcohol and narcotics that seemed to maintain a
blood frenzy, paid for by the wealth of the Duc d’Orléans, a craven
megalomaniac who desired to usurp the Throne on the backs of the
criminal underworld that he had unleashed.

Here in the French
Revolution is a dress rehearsal for the blood-letting by the Bolsheviks,
130 years later. At the Convent des Carmes, Rue de Vaugirard, up to 200
priests had been incarcerated. Here a drunken mob converged and with
pistols and sabres killed the defenceless priests.[26] The Archbishop of
Arles had his face cleaved almost in two, as he offered his life in the
hope of appeasing the bloodlust and sparing the other priests. The old
man’s death only excited the mob further, and they fired upon the
priests kneeling in prayer in the chapel.[37] Other such massacres were
conducted on priests imprisoned at the Abbaye in Paris. However, there
were more victims among ‘the people’ than among the aristocrats and
clergy. The revolutionary leaders sought to ‘amputate’ France, and to
radically reduce its population, reminiscent of Pol Pot.

In La
Vendée region a policy of wholesale extermination was undertaken to
eliminate a folk who remained steadfast to King and Church.

Webster
notes a curious transformation of France during the era, which shows
that the Revolution was a victory of the ‘under-man’ and a return to the
atavistic on the ruins of civilisation. She writes that mediocre
lawyers such as Robespierre, who now held the power, vented their
frustration at years of personal failure by trying to eliminate the
talented and intelligent. All those who had devoted themselves to
scholarship were targeted. ‘The war on education was even carried out
against the treasures of science, art and literature’. One revolutionary
luminary proposed killing the collection of rare animals at the Museum
of Natural History. A widespread notion of the revolutionaries was to
burn all the libraries and retain only books pertaining to the
Revolution and to law. Thousands of books and valuable paintings were
disposed of or destroyed. ‘Not only education but politeness in all
forms was to be destroyed’. It became necessary to assume a ‘rough and
boorish manner’ and to present ‘an uncultivated appearance’. ‘A refined
countenance, hands that bore no marks of manual labour, well-brushed
hair, clean and decent garments, were regarded with suspicion – to make
sure of keeping one’s head it was advisable that it should be unkempt’.
It was advisable to ruffle one’s hair, grow the thickness of whiskers,
soil the hands…’ ‘In a word, it was not only a war on nobility, on
wealth, on industry, on art, on intellect; it was a war on
civilisation’.[38]

It might be observed today that the cult of the dirty and the unkempt has become a normative aspect of society.

35.
Nesta H Webster, The French Revolution, 1919, 1969. Wermod and
Wermod, Britain, will be issuing a de luxe edition of The French
Revolution in 1912, with an introduction by this author. The pages cited
in this article are from the 1969 edition.

One of the "Big Lies'' permeating Fromm's Anatomy was the idea that the erotic drug-rock-sex counterculture was the antidote to the cybernetic, technetronic "necrophilous'' society. In reality, the Frankfurt School and their closest allies among the Russell/Wells/Huxley British oligarchy, were the architects of both the cybernetics project and the counterculture project of the 1960s. In fact, the Cybernetics Group, sponsored by the Josiah MacyFoundation, was the umbrella, under which the CIA and British intelligence conducted their mass experimentation with mind-altering psychedelic drugs, including LSD-25, which experiment was, eventually, spilled out onto the streets of San Francisco, New York's Greenwich Village, and every American college campus, giving us the counterculture "paradigm shift'' of 1966-72.

The Cybernetics Group, known among its members as the "Man-Machine Project,'' was unofficially launched in May 1942 at a New York City conference called the Cerebral Inhibition Meeting, sponsored by the medical director of the Josiah Macy Foundation, Frank Fremont-Smith. Among the participants were Warren McCulloch, Arturo Rosenblueth, Gregory Bateson, Margaret Mead, and Lawrence K. Frank. Rosenblueth, a protégé of Norbert Wiener, set out the broad parameters of the proposed effort. Speaking on behalf of Wiener and John von Neumann, he proposed to draw together a group of engineers, biologists, neurologists, anthropologists, and psychologists, to devise experiments in social control, based on the quack claim that the human brain was nothing more than a complex input/output machine, and that human behavior could, in effect, be programmed, on both an individual and societal scale. [fn1]

World War II prevented the project from getting off the ground for four years. But shortly after the Japanese surrendered, McCulloch asked Fremont-Smith to convene a second gathering under the formal sponsorship of the Macy Foundation. The first of what would be a series of ten major conferences and year-long research efforts, between 1946 and 1953, took place in New York City on March 8-9, 1946, under the title, "The Feedback Mechanisms and Circular Causal Systems in Biology and the Social Sciences Meeting.''

What came out of that first meeting was not only a demonic drive to create the ultimate engineered society, based on the fusion of man and machine. A core group of 20 people constituted themselves as a task force to carry out this mission, and would spawn a series of permanent institutions, where the work would continue, to the present day. A year after the founding session of the Macy project, Wiener would coin the term "cybernetics'' to describe their effort.

Who were the "Dr. Jekylls'' gathered around the table for the first of the Macy conferences?

Warren McCulloch was the titular chairman of all ten of the conferences. At the time of the first meeting, he was a professor of psychiatry and physiology at the University of Illinois, but he would soon move to the Research Laboratory of Electronics at MIT.

Walter Pitts, McCulloch's protégé, first at Illinois, and later at MIT.

Gregory Bateson, the anthropologist and then-spouse of Margaret Mead, who would soon become the director of research at the Veterans Hospital in Palo Alto, California, where he was a pivotal player in MK-Ultra and other secret government experiments with mind-altering drugs.

Margaret Mead, then the assistant curator of ethnology at the American Museum of Natural History in New York, who would function as the "earth goddess'' of the Cybernetics Group, and would help launch the modern feminist movement, through her patronage of Betty Friedan, a student-protégé of Kurt Lewin.

Kurt Lewin, founder of the Research Center for Group Dynamics at MIT, a leading Frankfurt School fellow-traveller, whose work with Frankfurt School founder Karl Korsch on linguistics would form a foundation of the field of Artificial Intelligence (AI). Lewin's National Training Laboratory would later become part of the National Education Association, and would facilitate the transformation of public education in America into an approximation of Bertrand Russell's nightmarish scheme for teaching children that "snow is black.''

Paul Lazarsfeld, the director of the Bureau of Applied Social Research at Columbia University, who had been the wartime head of the Radio Research Laboratory at Princeton University, and had been the patron there of the Frankfurt School's Theodor Adorno.

An incredible collection of guests attended the Cybernetics Group sessions during their seven years of existence. Among them were Max Horkheimer, the head of the Frankfurt School, who collaborated with the Cybernetics Group, while directing the Studies in Prejudice.

Dr. Harold Abramson, one of the CIA's top scientists engaged in the secret LSD experimentation, not only attended the Sixth Cybernetics Group conference, but worked with Dr. Frank Fremont-Smith, the research director of the Macy Foundation, on a series of spinoff conferences, where all of the top personnel of MK-Ultra were able to convene under Macy Foundation cover and finances, to plot out their mass drugging of America. In return, Abramson dutifully provided Fremont-Smith with ample personal supplies of LSD-25.

The Macy Foundation also provided financing and publicity for the British social engineer Dr. William Sargant, whose 1957 book, Battle for the Mind, provided a "how-to-do-it'' manual for mass brainwashing. Sargant spent 20 years in the United States, working on the MK-Ultra project and other secret mind-control efforts of the U.S. and British governments.

Among the nastiest of the projects launched by the Cybernetics Group was the World Federation of Mental Health (WFMH), whose first president, Brig. Gen. John Rawlings Rees, was the director of the Tavistock Institute, Britain's premier psychological warfare center.

Rees, Mead, Lawrence K. Frank, Fremont-Smith and Horkheimer were all in Paris together, in the summer of 1948, to launch the WFMH. Although he had died the previous year, Kurt Lewin had been involved in the preparations for launching the Federation, through his involvement, under Frank, in the National Committee for Mental Hygiene, and the London-centered International Committee for Mental Hygiene, with a half-dozen Cybernetics Group members on its board. Both bodies oversaw a network of over 4,000 "psychiatric shock troops,'' in Rees's words, who would be at the heart of a worldwide social-engineering apparatus, penetrated into every community.

Margaret Mead and Lawrence K. Frank, two pillars of the Cybernetics Group, authored the founding statement of Rees's World Federation of Mental Health (both Mead and Frank would later succeed Rees as president), which they titled, "Manifesto of the First International.'' Mead and Frank bluntly wrote: "The goal of mental health has been enlarged from the concern for the development of healthy personalities to the larger tasks of creating a healthy society.... The concept of mental health is co-extensive with world order and world community.'' Frank even proposed to create a new religion of mental health.

(...)

- LSD Freaks Meet Cyber-Hackers -

In 1974, Stewart Brand, chief propagandist for both the psychotropic drug revolution and the personal computer revolution, published a collection of his previously published essays under the title, II Cybernetic Frontiers. Two of the essays consisted of interviews he had conducted with Gregory Bateson, one of the architects of the psychedelic revolution in America, through his posting at the Palo Alto Veterans Hospital, where much MK-Ultra experimentation took place. Bateson was one of the four or five most influential members of the Cybernetics Group. The other, longer essay in the book, "Fanatic Life and Symbolic Death Among the Computer Bums,'' was first published in the December 1972 issue of the leading counterculture publication, Rolling Stone.

Brand began the Rolling Stone piece with the startling boast: "Ready or not, computers are coming to the people. That's good news, maybe the best since psychedelics.'' He continued, "It's way off the track of the 'Computers--Threat or Menace?' school of liberal criticism but surprisingly in line with the romantic fantasies of the fore-fathers of the science, such as Norbert Wiener, Warren McCulloch, J.C.R. Licklider, John von Neumann, and Vannevar Bush. The trend owes its health to an odd array of influences: the youthful fervor and firm dis-Establishmentarianism of the freaks who design computer science; an astonishingly enlightened research program from the very top of the Defense Department; an unexpected market-flanking movement by the manufacturers of small calculating machines; and an irrepressible midnight phenomenon known as Spacewar.''

Brand provided a detailed explanation of Spacewar, perhaps the very first computer war game to be designed. "Ah, Spacewar. Reliably, at any night-time moment (i.e., non-business hours) in North America, hundreds of computer technicians are effectively out of their bodies, computer-projected onto cathode ray tube display screens, locked in life-or-death space combat for hours at a time, ruining their eyes, numbing their fingers in frenzied mashing of control buttons, joyously slaying their friends and wasting their employers' valuable computer time.''

If this sounds like a mild version of the latter-day souped-up sex and violence video games of today--it is!

Beginning in 1963, when the U.S. space program was moved out of the military and housed under NASA, J.C.R. Licklider convinced his boss at ARPA (what would later be called DARPA) to devote a fraction of the agency's budget to computer research. At the time, the Department of Defense was the world's largest consumer of computers. Licklider became the director of an ARPA unit called IPTO (Information Processing Techniques Office), and, over the next years, disbursed millions of dollars to a wide range of computer and Artificial Intelligence research centers.

Until 1969, when the Mansfield Amendment placed restrictions on how the Pentagon could spend its research and development money, there were no boundary conditions on the kinds of projects that IPTO could bankroll. Billions of dollars went into the early development of computer networking, computer graphics, "virtual reality,'' simulation, and other key facets of what, today, is a $9-11 billion-a-year commercial industry of point-and-shoot video games. The Media Lab at MIT and the Stanford Artificial Intelligence Lab were two of the magnets for this money and the research work which fueled both the Pentagon training-simulation programs and the evolving video-game industry.

In his book On Killing, Lt. Col. David Grossman recounts how the advent of high-speed computers allowed the social engineers, responsible for training soldiers to overcome their aversion to killing, provided an unsurpassed technology for stimulus-response behavior modification. The increasingly realistic video graphics, the advanced work on neurological processes--all hallmarks of the cybernetic "man-machine'' project--transformed the U.S. military into a force of programmed killers, and ultimately became the social engineers' "weapon of choice'' for twisting the minds of millions of America's youth.

The social engineers seeking to fulfill Adorno, Horkheimer, Russell, and Huxley's visions of a perfectly engineered society, led by a "scientific dictatorship", were never far removed from the computer and AI labs where the technologies were being developed and tested. It was only a matter of time that, like the LSD experiments of the 1960s, the secret military experimental phase ended, and the American population became the targets, this time, of the sex and violence self-programming of Doom, Quake, and the rest.

AMERICAN FREE PRESSPsy-Ops Standard Fare for U.S. • CIA, Mossad have been dabbling in mind control for decades • Secret U.S. documents reveal infatuation with “brainwashing”

by Michael Collins Piper

Recent
articles in AMERICAN FREE PRESS about “mind control” have led some
readers to dismiss the topic as a “conspiracy theory” bordering on
science fiction.

In fact, there are several carefully documented
books on the history of mind-control experimentation demonstrating that
not only the CIA but also Israel’s Mossad and the Soviet KGB long
engaged in extensive experimentation in this arena.

And don’t
forget: In its simplest form, mind control is basically old-fashioned
hypnosis. There are few who deny hypnotic states can be induced.

One
of the earliest known “experts” in this bizarre science was George Estabrooks, chairman of the Department of Psychology at Colgate
University, who worked for the War Department in World War II. In his
book Hypnosis, Estabrooks described the importance of mind control for use in intelligence operations:

First,
there is no danger of the agent selling out. More important would be
the conviction of innocence which the man himself had. . . . He would
never “act guilty” and if ever accused of seeking information would be
quite honestly indignant. This conviction of innocence . . . is perhaps
his greatest safeguard under questioning by authorities. Finally, it
would be impossible to “third degree” him and so pick up the links of a
chain.

Estabrooks said people under mind control could
be encouraged to engage in “fifth column” activities: “Through them, we
would hope to be kept informed of the activities of their ‘friends,’
this information, of course, being obtained in the trance state.”

During
the 1950s the newly established CIA, the Mossad and the KGB began
heavy-duty research in this field. The CIA’s mind control
project—initially code-named “Bluebird” and then “Artichoke”—eventually
became MK-ULTRA.

However, it wasn’t until 1975—in the midst of a
controversial inquiry into the CIA conducted by then-Sen. Frank Church
(D-Idaho)—that the first details about the CIA’s mind-control ventures
reached public attention.

Until then, Americans believed only “Communists” and “Nazis” engaged in unpleasant experiments to manipulate human behavior.

Utilizing the Freedom of Information Act, Marks pried 16,000 pages of documents out of the CIA and in 1979 published his book, The Search for the Manchurian Candidate,
subtitled “The CIA and Mind Control: The Story of the Agency’s Secret
Efforts to Control Human Behavior.” Issued by a subdivision of The New York Times and no “extremist tract” by any estimation, Marks’s book remains the standard on this subject.

Marks
revealed that the impetus for the CIA’s mind-control operations came
from Richard Helms, who later became CIA director. Helms’s idea was
approved by then-CIA chief Allen Dulles. Under the supervision of James
Angleton, the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence and devoted CIA liaison
to Israel’s Mossad, chief of operations for the experiments was Sidney
Gottlieb, the director of the CIA’s technical services section, TSS.

According
to Marks, in June 1960 Gottlieb launched an expanded program of
operational experiments in hypnosis in cooperation with the CIA’s
counterintelligence [CI] staff who believed the hypnosis program could
provide “a potential breakthrough in clandestine technology.”

The
MK-ULTRA staff focused on developing mind-control techniques in the
laboratory while CIA operators handled “field experimentation” in order
to achieve three goals, as described by

Among the “additional avenues to the
control of human behavior” Gottlieb found appropriate to investigate
were “radiation, electro-shock, various fields of psychology,
psychiatry, sociology and anthropology, graphology, harassment
substances and paramilitary devices and materials.”

The New York Times
reported on Sept. 20, 1977 that, for over a decade, the CIA carried out
tests in New York and San Francisco in which prostitutes—“perhaps men
as well as women”—lured unsuspecting subjects to “safe houses” where
they “were offered cocktails laced with various chemicals while unseen
CIA officials observed, photographed and recorded their reactions.”

In
1975 the CIA admitted experiments were conducted at the Federal
Addiction Research Center in Lexington, Ky. involving the administration
of hallucinogens to prisoner volunteers. A key figure at the Lexington
operation was the base chaplain, Rabbi Maurice Davis, who later emerged
as an operative of the Anti-Defamation League, an arm of Israel’s
Mossad.

Considering all of this, it’s no surprise that mind-control
dabblers have been intensely interested in so-called “cults” that have
existed in virtually every culture, in one form or another. That cult
members—popularly said to be “brainwashed”—are pliable and do what their
masters tell them has made cults and their members special targets of
the CIA and Mossad.

For years it’s been openly speculated that one
of today’s best-known cults—the Unification Church—was actually created
by the CIA, using CIA assets inside Korean intelligence.

There is
solid evidence another well-known cult was taken over at its highest
level by a clique of Jewish lawyers and that since then the cult’s vast
worldwide financial (and membership) resources have been utilized on
behalf of the Mossad agenda.

Generally from all walks of
life—whether working inside banks, telephone companies, historical
revisionist institutes, government agencies or fastfood restaurants—cult
members are thus available for deployment when higher-ups (operating
under the direction of CIA or Mossad controllers) want to use them in
some particular operation.

How many “lone gunmen” exploited by the
media to promote gun control were actually subjected to mind control is a
question that may never be answered, but the bottom line is this: Mind
control is for real.

—— Michael Collins Piper is a world-renowned author, journalist, lecturer and radio show host.
He has spoken in Russia, Malaysia, Iran, Abu Dhabi, Japan, Canada and,
of course, the United States. He is the author of Final Judgment, The
New Jerusalem, The High Priests of War, Dirty Secrets, My First Days in
the White House, The New Babylon, Share the Wealth: Huey Long vs Wall
Street, The Judas Goats: The Enemy Within, Target: Traficant and The
Golem: Israel’s Nuclear Hell Bomb.

THE JUDAS GOATSTHE ENEMY WITHIN
by Michael Collins Piper

Chapter Twenty-FourIntelligence Agency Manipulationof the Science of Mind ControlAnd Exploitation of the Cult Phenomenon:A Very Real Tactic of The Enemy Within

In light of speculation that Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh was subjected at one time or another to some form of “mind control,”it is worth reviewing some of the solid evidence which demonstrates that extensive experimentation in the field of mind control has been conducted by not only the CIA and its allies in Israel’s intelligence agency, the Mossad, but also by the Soviet KGB and other agencies.
The subject of mind control un-nerves many people who dismiss the topic as some form of “science fiction” or “conspiracy theory.”
However, the truth is that mind control—in perhaps its simplest form—is nothing more than old-fashioned hypnosis—and there are few who deny that hypnotic states can be induced.
There are several well-written and thoroughly-researched books that have examined the history of mind control experimentation and technology.
One of the earliest known “experts” in the bizarre science of mind control was George Estabrooks, chairman of the Department of Psychology at Colgate University who came to Washington to work for the War Department in World War II. In his book Hypnosis, Estabrooks described how important mind-control could be for use in intelligence operations. ”First,” he wrote:

There is no danger of the agent selling out. More important would be the conviction of innocence which the man himself had, and this is a great aid in many situations. He would never “act guilty” and if ever accused of seeking information would be quite honestly indignant. This conviction of innocence on the part of a criminal is perhaps his greatest safeguard under questioning by authorities. Finally, it would be impossible to ‘third degree’ him and so pick up the links of a chain.

Estabrooks said that people under mind-control can be encouraged to engage in so-called “fifth column” activities. “Through them,” he wrote, “we would hope to be kept informed of the activities of their ‘friends,’ this information, of course, being obtained in the trance state.”
Following Estabrooks’ pioneering work, it was during the 1950s that the newly-formed CIA (and its allies in Israel’s Mossad)—as well as the Soviet KGB—began heavy-duty research in this field.
Perhaps the most authoritative work examining the CIA’s activity is The Search for the Manchurian Candidate, subtitled “The CIA and Mind Control: The Story of the Agency’s Secret Efforts to Control Human Behavior.” First published in 1979, the book was very rare and only recently went back into print. Certainly no “extremist tract,” the book was first published by a subdivision of no less than the prestigious New York Times.The author was John Marks, best known as the co-author, with flamboyant former high-ranking CIA official Victor Marchetti, of The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence, the first book ever censored prior to publication by the CIA.
(Marks’ book title was a play on the title of a famous 1958 Richard Condon novel—later a popular motion picture—The Manchurian Candidate. In Condon’s horrifying scenario, an American soldier is brainwashed by the communists during the Korean War, falsely set up as a “war hero,” and later manipulated in an assassination plot upon his return to the United States.
(It turns out that the hero’s own mother is actually a secret communist agent—despite the fact that she is one of the best known “anticommunists” in America—and is using her son as part of a communist plot to seize control of the United States in the guise of fighting communism—truly The Enemy Within.The mind-control victim never knows he is being manipulated—until it is too late.)
Marks’s book was not a novel. Instead, Marks’ study was based largely on some 16,000 pages of documents that Marks pried out of the CIA through the Freedom of Information Act.
Several years before Marks’ book came out, the first details about the CIA’s adventures in this bizarre field reached the pages of daily newspapers in the wake of a controversial series of Senate hearings conducted by Sen. Frank Church (D-Idaho) into the activities of the CIA.
Until then, Americans believed that only the “Communists” and the “Nazis” had engaged in unpleasant experiments to study the process of manipulating human behavior.
In truth, the CIA had delved into mind control beginning just shortly after its creation in 1947.The CIA’s mind control project was initially known as “Bluebird” and then later expanded into “Artichoke” by 1953.
The overall code name for the operation became known as MK-ULTRA.
The impetus for the CIA’s mind-control operations came from Richard Helms who went on to head the CIA’s entire clandestine operations program, and then become CIA director. Helms’ idea was approved by then-CIA chief Allen Dulles who gave the go-ahead for the project. Chief of operations for the experiments was the chief of the agency’s technical services section (TSS), one Dr. Sidney Gottlieb, although he was under the supervision of James Jesus Angleton, the CIA’s chief of counterintelligence and the Israeli Mossad’s devoted liaison at the CIA.
According to Marks, in June 1960 [Gottlieb’s] TSS officials launched an expanded program of operational experiments in hypnosis in cooperation with the CIA’s Counterintelligence [CI] staff:

Counterintelligence officials wrote that the hypnosis program could provide a ‘potential breakthrough in clandestine technology.’Their arrangement with TSS was that the MK-ULTRA men would develop the technique in the laboratory, while they took care of ‘field experimentation.’ The Counterintelligence program had three goals: (1) to induce hypnosis very rapidly in unwitting subjects; (2) to create durable amnesia; and (3) to implant durable and operationally useful posthypnotic suggestions.

Marks noted that the CIA’s prime locale for its mind-control experiments was Mexico City.The Mexican capital was, during the Cold War period, according to all accounts, the Western Hemisphere’s primary nest of international intelligence intrigue. It was in Mexico City where—as we’ve noted—E. Howard Hunt served as the CIA’s station chief and one of his CIA lieutenants was none other than future pundit,William F. Buckley, Jr.,who emerged as a leading figure in the effort to bend traditional American conservatism toward internationalism. Mexico City was also a major base of operations for Israel’s Mossad.
According to formerly secret CIA documents released under the Freedom of Information Act, among the “additional avenues to the control of human behavior” that Gottlieb’s operatives found appropriate to investigate were “radiation, electro-shock, various fields of psychology, psychiatry, sociology and anthropology, graphology, harassment substances and paramilitary devices and materials.”
The New York Times reported on September 20, 1977 that “The documents show that the tests were carried out in New York City and San Francisco between 1953 and 1966, in CIA ‘safe houses,’ mainly apartments and motel rooms, that were secretly rented for the agency by an official of the old Federal Bureau of Narcotics, since supplanted by the Drug Enforcement Administration.
“Prostitutes, perhaps men as well as women, may have been employed to lure the subjects to the safe houses, where they were offered cocktails laced with various chemicals while unseen CIA officials observed, photographed and recorded their reactions.”
The CIA is also known to have conducted drug experiments with drug addicts held at a federal facility. In 1975 the CIA formally admitted that experiments were conducted at the Federal Addiction Research Center in Lexington, Kentucky, involving the administration of drugs, including hallucinogens, to prisoner volunteers.
One prisoner, James H. Childs, testified to a Senate committee of inquiry that the prisoners who participated in the CIA program were paid by the CIA in the form of addictive drugs.
Another former prisoner who testified, Edward M. Flowers, said that LSD was given to prisoners in cookies during experiments. From 1952 to 1955, he said, prisoners were allowed to take their pay for being in the programs in either drugs or time off their sentences.
One of the key figures at the CIA’s Lexington, Kentucky operation was the on-base chaplain, Rabbi Maurice Davis who, in later years, emerged as a widely-known operative of the Anti-Defamation League, the politically influential American-based intelligence and propaganda arm of Israel’s secret service, the Mossad.
Other experiments in drug-induced mind-control were conducted at the Vacaville prison facility in California. It was there, according to one witness, that Donald DeFreeze, later head of the violent terrorist group, the Symbionese Liberation Army, told another inmate that he, too, was part of the CIA’s mind-control experiments.
DeFreeze and his gang later kidnapped Patty Hearst of the Hearst publishing empire and brought her into their criminal activities. Later Miss Hearst’s attorneys said they believed she showed signs of being under the influence of drugs.
Considering all of this, it is no surprise that the CIA and the Mossad have long had a particular interest in the phenomenon of cults, which have long been in existence in virtually every culture, in one form or another. Cult members are typically very pliable and willing to do whatever their masters tell them.
And this is one reason why the CIA and the Mossad have been especially determined to gain control of cult groups at the highest levels and thereby use those cults—and their members—to advance their own agendas.
In addition, there is widespread speculation that some of the best known cults today—such as the infamous Unification Church of Sun Myung Moon, to name just one—are actually outright creations of state intelligence services. In another case, a group of Zionist lawyers, largely based in California, are known to have grabbed control, at the highest levels, behind the scenes, of another well-known “religious” organization—called a “church”by its members but often described as a “cult” by its critics—and utilized the vast financial (and membership) resources of that cult for their own purposes.
Here’s how the mind control operations of the CIA and the Mossad (utilizing cult groups) work:While these intelligence agencies actually control the cults, the lower-level cult members do not know, of course, that they are now part of a highly-sophisticated intelligence-based mindcontrol operation.
While the cult members are completely subservient to their higher-ups, subject to their discipline, the cult members, naturally, are from all walks of life and some reach high positions of influence within the companies and organizations in which they work in their day-to-day life outside the cult. However they always remain loyal because of the “brainwashing” process to which they have been subjected.
Sometimes the cult members are open about their cult membership.
Other times—for strategic reasons—they do not reveal their cult affiliation, if the cult association could hinder the “black op” underway.
Whether the cult members are employed by political groups, historical revisionist research institutes, banks, insurance companies, government agencies, or even fast-food restaurants,they will always be available for deployment when their higher-ups in the cult (operating at the behest of the CIA or the Mossad) make the decision to carry out some particular intelligence operation.
For example: suppose a member of a Mossad-controlled cult is employed by a maverick, dissident political group which is considered dangerous to the Establishment. If the Mossad wishes to undermine that organization, it will utilize its control of the cult to manipulate that individual to work to wreck the organization from within.
Liberty Lobby, the populist institution that published The Spotlight until Liberty Lobby was driven into bankruptcy and destroyed by a corrupt federal judge in 2001, had its own unpleasant experiences with the operatives of one cult.
Over a period of many years, admitted, overt operatives of the cult made friendly contact with Liberty Lobby.
The cult members supplied Liberty Lobby with hard-hitting and factual information about corrupt activities within the federal government.
Behind-the-scenes, however, the cultists were working to disrupt the work of Liberty Lobby on other fronts.
A cult member (Matthew Peter Balic)—who did not reveal his membership in the cult—frequently attended Liberty Lobby meetings, visited Liberty Lobby headquarters, and socialized with Liberty Lobby employees, gaining their confidence.
(This was the same modus operandi of the infamous Roy Edward Bullock, now exposed as a long-time operative of the CIA-allied, Israeli Mossad-controlled Anti-Defamation League.)
After some time, however, it became apparent that Balic, ostensibly a friend of Liberty Lobby, was, in fact, trying to undermine the populist institution and its weekly newspaper in a wide variety of ways. It was not until later that Liberty Lobby’s suspicions were confirmed and Balic's affiliation with the cult was exposed.
Liberty Lobby learned that Balic was a former alcoholic who joined the cult and then reformed. In the process, however, Balic became subject to the cult’s discipline (and its controllers) and emerged as one of the cult’s key national intelligence operatives, in this case deployed against Liberty Lobby.
It was precisely at the time that Liberty Lobby learned that Balic was a cult operative that the previously-friendly other members of the cult (who had openly acknowledged their affiliation) abruptly broke off all contact with Liberty Lobby.
Later, the cult played a special role in a broad-ranging conspiracy that resulted in the destruction of Liberty Lobby.
But the role of cults in the world of intelligence intrigue is something that few understand or know about.
In another case, it was revealed that a Justice Department special task force was investigating charges that a notorious cult known as “the Finders”was used by the CIA as a front group during the 1980’s.
What makes the intelligence agency’s reported link to this particular cult especially troubling is that the Finders have been accused of engaging in Satanic rituals, child abuse and pornography. Federal authorities were also trying to determine whether the CIA impeded state and local investigations of child abuse within the cult in order to protect its own intelligence operations.
The CIA, never known to own up to its own misdeeds, responded to the charges by saying, “Most days we expect our share of unusual questions, but his one is clear off the wall. Any claim that we obstructed justice in this case is nuts.”
A CIA spokesman, David Christian, admitted, however, that it had sent some of its agents to a company called Future Enterprises, Inc. for computer training. However, according to Christian, the nation’s crack intelligence agency did not know about connections between the computer company and the Finders cult.
Christian claimed that the company “was in no sense a CIA front or ever owned or operated by anyone for the CIA.”
However, the president of Future Enterprises, Joseph Marinich, admitted that his company was under contract to the CIA for computer training. Marinich admitted, further, that his tax accountant, R. Gardner Terrell,was a Finders member.
Finders cult members claimed that Terrell’s work for Future Enterprises had nothing to do with his membership in the cult.
Finally, an April 13, 1987 report by a Customs Service Agent who was investigating the Finders cult said that the CIA “admitted to owning the Finders organization as a front for a domestic computer training operation but that it had ‘gone bad.’”
(In other words, the CIA had been using the Finders as a front, but that the cult members had become engaged in activities beyond the control of the CIA and, as such, had “gone bad.’)
Clearly, the use of “mind control” in general, as well as the secret control and manipulation of cults, by the CIA and the Mossad and myriad other evil-doers has a very real (and ugly) history that many people are too eager to discredit as “science fiction” or “conspiracy theories.”
Mind control is a fact.
It is another mechanism used by The Enemy Within to wage war against political dissidents in America.The next time you hear someone claim that he has an “implant,” put in his head by the CIA, don’t dismiss what he’s saying out of hand. For it may very well be true.
How many “lone assassins,”“lone bombers,”“right-wing racist gunmen,” and other such poster boys for the media monopoly in America to exploit have been subjected to some form of mind control is a question that may never be answered, but the bottom line is this:
Mind control is for real.

Once the hectoring hegemons have created a core-lie and got people to believe or accept it, namely, that 'war on terror' is real and "our war", then many truths within the core-lie can be fabricated, and also are created due to their own natural dynamics with proper black-ops channeling to mobilize insurgency and then officially fighting it as "counter-insurgency". A cook-book recipe for fabricating "revolutionary times", for indeed, "what is inconceivable in normal times is possible in revolutionary times"! A self-sustaining system dynamics comes into existence which is closely managed and continually harvested to sustain "imperial mobilization"

These dynamics are the puppetshows of harvest that Rafia Zakaria is commenting on in her DAWN article of April 07, 2010: "Reinventing the Taliban", while she is strategically silent on the core lie itself: Read More...

The Victory of ‘Perception Management’
Special Report: In the 1980s, the Reagan administration pioneered
“perception management” to get the American people to “kick the Vietnam
Syndrome” and accept more U.S. interventionism, but that propaganda
structure continues to this day getting the public to buy into endless
war, writes Robert Parry.